> This was one of the most successful product launches of all time. They signed up 100 million new user accounts in a week! They had a single hour where they signed up a million new accounts, as this thing kept on going viral again and again and again.
Awkwardly, I never heard of it until now. I was aware that at some point they added ability to generate images to the app, but I never realized it was a major thing (plus I already had an offline stable diffusion app on my phone, so it felt less of an upgrade to me personally). With so much AI news each week, feels like unless you're really invested in the space, it's almost impossible to not accidentally miss or dismiss some big release.
Congratulations, you are almost fully unplugged from social media. This product launch was a huge mainstream event; for a few days GPT generated images completely dominated mainstream social media.
If you primarily consume text-based social media (HN, reddit with legacy UI) then it's kind of easy to not notice all the new kinds of image infographics and comics that now completely flood places like instagram or linkedin.
Not sure if this is sarcasm or sincere, but I will take it as sincere haha. I came back to work from parental leave and everyone had that same Studio Ghiblized image as their Slack photo, and I had no idea why. It turns out you really can unplug from social media and not miss anything of value: if it’s a big enough deal you will find out from another channel.
Why does everyone keep calling news "social media"? Have I missed a trend? Knowing what my friend Steve is up to is social media, knowing what AI is up to is news.
I'm afraid a lot of Americans consume the news like they consume sports media. They root for their team and select a news stream that presents them with the most favorable coverage.
If we try really hard, I think we can make an exhaustive list of what viral fads on the internet are not. You made a small start.
none of these ephemeral fads are any indication of quality, longevity, legitimacy, interest, substance, endurance, prestige, relevance, credibility, allure, staying-power, refinement, or depth.
I think it sounds far more likely that 100M people signed up to poke at the latest viral novelty and create one meme, than that 100M people suddenly discovered they had a pressing long-term need for AI images all on the same day.
It's neither of these options in this false dichotomy.
100M people signed up and did at least 1 task. Then, most likely some % of them discovered it was a useful thing (if for nothing else than just to make more memes), and converted into a MAU.
If I had to use my intuition, I would say it's 5% - 10%, which represents a larger product launch than most developers will ever participate in, in the context of a single day.
Of course the ongoing stickiness of the MAU also depends on the ability of this particular tool to stay on top amongst increasing competition.
Apparently OpenAI is losing money like crazy on this and their conversion rates to paid are abysmal, even for the cheaper licenses. And not even their top subscription covers its cost.
Uber at a 10x scale.
I should add that compared to the hype, at a global level Uber is a failure. Yes, it's still a big company, yes, it's profitable now, but I think it was launched 10+ years ago and it's barely becoming net profitabile over it's existence now and shows no signs of taking over the world. Sure, it's big in the US and a few specific markets. But elsewhere it's either banned for undermining labor practices or has stiff local competition or it's just not cost competitive and it won't enter the market because without the whole "gig economy" scam it's just a regular taxi company with a better app.
It's quite hard to say for sure, and I will prefix my comment by saying his blog posts are very long and quite doomerist about LLMs, but he makes a decent case about OpenAI financials:
A very solid argument is like that against propaganda: it's not so much about what is being said but what about isn't. OpenAI is basically shouting about every minor achievement from the rooftops so the fact that they are remarkably silent about financial fundamentals says something. At best something mediocre or more likely bad.
All very fair caveats/heads up about Ed Zitron, but just for context for others: he is an actual journalist that has been in the tech space for a long time, and has been critical of lots of large figures in tech for a long time. He has a cohesive thesis around the tech industry, so his thoughts on AI/LLMs aren't out of nowhere and disconnected.
Basically, it's one of those things you may read and find that, all things considered, you don't agree with the conclusions, but there's real substance there and you'll probably benefit from reading a few of his articles.
While 100M signing up just for one pic is certainly possible, I note that several hundred million people regularly share photographs of their lunch, so it is very plausible that in signing up for the latest meme generator they found they liked the ability to generate custom images of whatever they consider to be pretty pictures every day.
It’s hard to think of a worse analogy TBH. My wife is using ChatGPT to change photos (still is to this day), she didn’t use it or any other LLM until that feature hit. It is a fad, but it’s also a very useful tool.
Ape NFTs are… ape NFTs. Useless. Pointless. Negative value for most people.
I would note that I was replying to a comment about the 'big trend of ghiblification' of images.
Reproducing a certain style of image has been a regular fad since profile pictures became a thing sometime last century.
I was not meaning to suggest that large language & diffusion models are fads.
(I do think their capabilities are poorly understood and/or over-estimated by non-technical and some technical people alike, but that invites a more nuanced discussion.)
While I'm sure your wife is getting good value out of the system, whether it's a better fit for purpose, produces a better quality, or provides a more satisfying workflow -- than say a decent free photo editor -- or whether other tools were tried but determined to be too limited or difficult, etc -- only you or her could say. It does feel like a small sample set, though.
Applying some filters and adding some overlay text is something some folks did, but there's such a massive creative world that's opened up, where all we have to do is ask.
I am contrasting how instagram filters gave users some control and increased user base and how today editing photos with LLMs is doing the same and pulling in a wider user base.
they're not but I'm already seeing ai generated images on billboards for local businesses, they're in production workflows now and they aren't going anywhere
I just don't understand how people can see "100 million signups in a week" and immediately dismiss it. We're not talking about fidget spinners. I don't get why this sentiment is so common here on HackerNews. It's become a running joke in other online spaces, "HackerNews commenters keep saying that AI is a nothingburger." It's just a groupthink thing I guess, a kneejerk response.
I assume, when people dismiss it, they are not looking at it through the business lens and the 100m user signups KPI, but they are dismissing it on technical grounds, as an LLM is just a very big statistical database which seems incapable of solving problems beyond (impressive looking) text/image/video generation.
Makes sense. Although I think that's an error. TikTok is "just" a video sharing site. Joe Rogan is "just" a podcaster. Dumb things that affect lots of people are important.
Everything Everywhere All At Once won a bunch of Oscars. They used generative AI tools for some of their post-production work (achieved by a tiny team), for example to help clean up the backgrounds in the scene with the silent dialog between the two rocks.
You're right, nothing has value unless someone figures out how to make money with it. Except OpenAI, apparently, because the fact that people buy ChatGPT to make images doesn't seem to count as a commercial use case.
Except lots of people are paying for it. I'll refer you to the other post on the front page for the calculation that OpenAI would have to get just an extra $10/yr from their users to break even.
They still are. Instagram is full of accounts posting gpt-generated cartoons (and now veo3 videos). I’ve been tracking the image generation space from day one, and it never stuck like this before
Anecdotally, I've had several conversations with people way outside the hyper-online demographic who have been really enjoying the new ChatGPT image generation - using it for cartoon photos of their kids, to create custom birthday cards etc.
I think it's broken out into mainstream adoption and is going to stay there.
It reminds me a little of Napster. The Napster UI was terrible, but it let people do something they had never been able to do before: listen to any piece of music ever released, on-demand. As a result people with almost no interest in technology at all were learning how to use it.
Most people have never had the ability to turn a photo of their kids into a cute cartoon before, and it turns out that's something they really want to be able to do.
Definitely. It’s not just online either - half the billboards I see now are AI. The posters at school. The “we’re hiring!” ad at the local McDonalds. It’s 100x cheaper and faster than any alternative (stock images, hiring an editor or illustrator, etc), and most non technical people can get exactly what they want in a single shot, these days.
To be clear: they already had image generation in ChatGPT, but this was a MUCH better one than what they had previously. Even for you with your stable diffusion app, it would be a significant upgrade. Not just because of image quality, but because it can actually generate coherent images and follow instructions.
As impressive as it is, for some uses it still is worse than a local SD model.
It will refuse to generate named anime characters (because of copyright, or because it just doesn't know them, even not particularly obscure ones) for example.
Or obviously anything even remotely spicy.
As someone who mostly uses image generation to amuse myself (and not to post it, where copyright might matter) it's honestly somewhat disappointing. But I don't expect any of the major AI companies to release anything without excessive guardrails.
I saw that, I just didn't connect it with newly added multimodal image generation. I knew variations of style transfer (or LoRA for SD) were possible for years, so I assumed it exploded in popularity purely as a meme, not due to OpenAI making it much more accessible.
Again, I was aware that they added image generation, just not how much of a deal it turned out to be. Think of it like me occasionally noticing merchandise and TV trailers for a new movie without realizing it became the new worldwide box office #1.
Awkwardly, I never heard of it until now. I was aware that at some point they added ability to generate images to the app, but I never realized it was a major thing (plus I already had an offline stable diffusion app on my phone, so it felt less of an upgrade to me personally). With so much AI news each week, feels like unless you're really invested in the space, it's almost impossible to not accidentally miss or dismiss some big release.